Ok I couldn't resist. I've used Google Earth for at least 5 years now for finding ways into different area in the desert (mostly). A couple of years ago I purchased Google Earth Pro ($20 yr) to be able to layer my GPS tracks on top of the terrain photos. It works and is fairly good for some purposes. It (Pro version) does not give you any better resolution for viewing on your computer than the free version does.

So where do they get their photos --- satellite, and fly over mapping mostly. Some are relatively new (couple of years old) and some are really old (more than 5 years). 5 years doesn't sound like a lot but the technology wasn't tha good back then and the photos weren't nearly as good as they are now. Some areas are great and you can see cars, boats, planes (flying) in some of them. Most of these great resolution ones are in or near cities. Although there are some good ones out in the wilds.

Some areas (not just Area 51) like military bases; which maybe gunnery ranges, bombing ranges, etc are not clear and probably never will be, because of the military's use of the areas. Some of the areas (Picacho Peak area) for example are just old maps that don't have good resolution. They update maps based on proposed use of them. Guess what cities and rural areas come first. I'm sure it's a lot of work splicing them into photos that already exist. And sometimes they don't do a good job of it either. Example Rt # 78 just North of Ogilby Rd. -- the road doesn't align correctly in several places. Google Earth is fun to look at when going into a new area, but your better off iwth a good topo map or program. And if you have a Garmin then they have a good topo program, which I have copies of (2008 version)! Also another one is the one Jim uses but you can only upload their own tracks to the topo. Jim will tell you name of it, I can't use it because my Garmin tracks won't load into the program.

So here's the thing, Google Earth is free so download it. It's fun to use but not worth paying for. Even with good resolution on Google Earth, a good topo is better. You information, waypoints, etc are not secure on Google, remember that!

Goldseeker: The government could care less about the photos on Google Earth. They have their own satellite reconnaissance equipment that puts Google Earth to shame. Are you afraid of everything?

One other thing you should know --- http://www.bing.com/maps/ is a microsoft based map and photo site that's free and there's more. maps.google.com is also available for seeing that sort of thing and for getting down to street level for views of homes, businesses, etc.

Google Earth Pro uses the same image database as the free and Pro trial versions, so there are no changes to the locations you see in the free and Pro trial versions. However, with Google Earth Pro, you can print these locations at higher resolution (4800 pixels). You also receive additional professional tools to enhance your organization's productivity

They do update it on a regular basis, when they get new satellite imagery, but, once it starts to get blurry, or fuzzy, that's the extent of what they have.

What I would LIKE to see in Google Earth will likely never happen - a way to "overlay" the identical region you are looking at via satellite photo with USGS topo maps. Maybe the 'next generation' will? Thanks Djui5, will have to spend some time looking it over.Oroblanco

Jim Hatt wrote:Still things I know about that I can't see, but it is a huge improvement from what it was.

Jim

I agree. I know of some things out there that can't be seen on the updated pictures, but it is a LOT better than it was, and you can finally get a decent idea of the terrain out there, which is what I was concerned with.